Allahabad Court August 1977 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Uma Shankar Dixit Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All194
Hari Swarup, J.1. The petitioner claims to be a tenant of the accommodation. He got an allotment order under the provisions of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (Act No. XIII of 1972) on 25-8-1976. In respect of this property proceedings for acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act had commenced by a notification under Section 4 of the Act in 1965. Final notification was issued in 1968 under Section 6 of the Act. The acquisition was for a company. The petitioner by a letter addressed to the Chief Minister of the State dated 29th Sept. 1976 requested that the property be released fromacquisition, and also prayed for the stay of the acquisition proceedings. The award was given by the Collector on 4-8-1977. The present petition has now been filed.2. The petitioner has challenged the acquisition proceedings and has further alleged that even if the proceedings be there, he cannot be ejected under Section 16 of the Land Acquisition Act.3. So far...
Govind Sharan and anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1977
Reported in: 1977CriLJ2007
ORDERB.N. Katju, J.1. This is an application Under Section 482 Cr. P. C. praying that the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ghaziabad dated 6-12-1976 and the order of the District and Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad dated 12-1-1977 be quashed.2. Salek Chand, opposite party No. 2, filed an application on 4-6-1976 Under Section 145 Cr. P. C. in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ghaziabad for initiating proceedings Under Section 145 Cr.P. C. against the applicants. It was alleged in the application that the applicants had taken forcible possession of plot No. 665 in village Pilkhua in which a Calander Mill was situated and plot No. 666 in which a pond (talab) was situated which were used by the general public. Both these plots were alleged to belong to the Land Management Committee of village Khera. When Salek Chand and other members of the public requested the applicants not to make constructions in the aforesaid plots the applicants became furious and demonstrated by show of f...
Smt. Neelima Arora Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All111
R.B. Misra, J.1. The present appeal is a sequel to an unfortunate accident, which took place on 19th July 1971, in which Brij Mohan Arora lost his life in the following circumstances:Brij Mohan Arora was a Medical Officer attached to Primary Health Centre, Binauli Block, Tahsil Sardbana, district Meerut. He was under orders of transfer to Chamoli. On the fateful day, he was going from Meerut to Sardhana on his motorcycle No. USD 4119 at about 8.30 A.M. A military truck No. RC 5587 came from the opposite direction. In overtaking a rickshaw, it dashed against the motor-cycle of Brij Mohan Arora causing serious injuries. He was taken to the hospital where he died, leaving behind his widow Smt. Neelima Arora and two minor children, namely Shalini Arora, minor daughter aged about if years, and Baby Arora, minor son, aged about two months. Smt. Neelima Arora, his widow, filed a claim on her behalf and on behalf of her minor children and claimed a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- by way of compensation ...
Simplex Concrete Piles (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. S. Ahmad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All195
M. N. Shukla, J.1. This is adefendant's appeal from an order rejecting an application under Order 9, Rule 13, C. P. C. for setting aside the ex partedecree.2. The plaintiff respondent made an application on 24th May, 1972 for leave to file a suit in forma pauperis for recovery of Rs. 23,202.10P. from the defendant. It is significant that the defendant appeared at this stage and contested the said application. It is also necessary to mention that the plaintiff applied under Order 38 Rule 5, C. P. C. for attachment before judgment. This again was contested by the defendant. The leave tosue in forma pauperis was granted on 24th Jan. 1974. The application for attachment, we have been informed, was dismissed. Thereafter fresh summons was issued to the defendant company and the court by its order dated 22nd Dec. 1975 held that the summons has been sufficiently served on the defendant. In these circumstances, an ex parte decree was passed against the defendant on 4th March, 1976. On 11th Marc...
Safdar HusaIn Vs. the Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All53
M.N. Shukla, J. 1. These appeals arise from the dismissal of a suit for declaration of the plaintiff's removal from railway service as void and/or other connected reliefs, namely, a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from realising the sum of Rs. 10,510.21 Paise from the plaintiff by deducting the same from the Provident Fund dues payable to him, a declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to 15 months' pay by way of gratuity permissible under the rules on reaching the age of superannuation on 12-5-1971 and any other appropriate relief. The trial court dismissed the suit with costs. The plaintiff preferred an appeal which was partly allowed by theAddl. District Judge, Bareilly and the order dated 6-8-1970 passed by the defendant directing recovery of Rupees 10,510.21 Paise from the plaintiff was set aside. The rest of the decree was maintained. In these circumstances both parties have filed the present appeals in this court. 2. The basic facts of the case are not in disput...
Shiv Shiv Tewari Vs. Ganesh Prasad Misra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All117
T.S. Misra, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff arises out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 600/- from the defendants by sale of the mortgaged property. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants had obtained a loan of Rs. 600/- from him and had executed a deed of usufructuary mortgage mortgaging with possession certain properties detailed and described in the plaint. The mortgage deed was executed on 3-4-1942 and the time fixed for payment under the mortgage was five years. Since the defendants failed to repay the loan a suit for the said relief was filed.2. The suit was resisted by the defendants on a number of grounds, one of them being that the suit was barred by time. The trial court held that the suit was filed within limitation, it also accepted the contentions raised by the plaintiff and repelled the allegations made by the defendants. The suit was accordingly decreed for Rs. 600 against the defendants and a preliminary decree was ordered to be passed accordingly.3. Against that deci...
Shyam Manohar Lal Vs. 4th Addl. Dist. and Sessions Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All238
ORDERD.N. Jha, J.1. This petition has been directed against the order dated 4-10-1974 passed by the IVth Additional District Judge, Kheri. It may be mentioned that there were three revisions relating to different subject-matters before the Additional District Judge, Kheri, and that is why three different sets of orders were passed although the subject-matter of the judgments is one and the same. These orders are contained in Annexures 4, 5 and 6.2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner was the landlord of the premises of which opposite party No. 3, District Agriculture Officer, Kheri, was the tenant. The petitioner filed a suit in the court of Munsif, Kheri, for ejectment of the opposite party, for arrears of rent and damages for use and occupation coupled with the prayer for ejectment. The suit was contested. Thereafter it was transferred to the Judge, Small Causes, in view of the amendment brought about by U. P. Act No. 37 of 1972 which came into force on 20-9-1972, The case cam...
Subhash Chandra JaIn Vs. Smt. Vidyut Jain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All234
ORDERYashoda Nandan, J.1. This is a revision arising out of a suit instituted by the plaintiff-opposite party against the applicant for recovery of amount of Rs. 8,570/- as arrears of maintenance allowance for the period commencing 1st of August, 1969 and ending 30th September, 1971, for future maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 400/- per month for return of ornaments of the plaintiff-opposite party alleged to have been illegally detained by the defendant-applicant or in the alternative for an amount of Rs. 11,600/- as compensation therefor and for permanent injunction to restrain the applicant from entering into matrimony with one Km. Ushi or any other girl or woman.2. The suit was instituted by the opposite party on the allegations that she was married to the applicant according to Jain Dharmashastra on the 8th of June, 1969 at her parents' residence at Etah. It was alleged that while the applicant was employed and lived at Delhi his parents resided at Calcutta. According to th...
Smt. Pari Bai and ors. Vs. Bhagat Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1977
Reported in: AIR1977All549
K.C. Agrawal, J.1. On the 19th July, 1966, occurred an accident in which Bhagwan Dass, husband of Smt. Pari Bai, appellant No. 1 and father of appellants Nos. 2 to 4, died in a motor accident. A cause of action accrued to the appellants to claim compensation as legal representatives of the deceased, under the Indian Fatal Accidents Act, 1855. A suit could be brought under Article 82 of the Limitation Act, 1963, within two years of the occurrence of the accident. But, in the meantime, the Government of U. P, constituted the Claims Tribunal by a notification published in the Gazette dated 7th March, 1967. Despite the fact that a Tribunal had been constituted at Dehra Dun. where the appellants could file an application for compensation under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, they were advised to file a regular suit in the civil court on 1st April, 1968. The suit was contested by the respondents. One of the main grounds raised in the suit was whether the suit filed by the appellants...
Jagdishwar Sahai Vs. Surjan Singh Pal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1977
Reported in: AIR1977All554
K.N. Seth, J.1. The suit giving rise to the present revision was instituted on 1-8-1972 for eviction of the defendant applicant on the strength of permission obtained by the plaintiff under Section 3 of the U. P. Act No. III of 1947 and also on the ground that he had committed default in payment of rent in spite of a notice of demand. A decree for arrears of rent and pendente lite and future mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 60/- per month was also claimed, The trial Court rejected the plaintiff's contention that the defendant was in arrears of rent when the notice of demand was served on him. The suit for ejectment, however, was decreed on the basis of the permission under Section 3 of Act No. III of 1947. Pendente lite and future mesne profits was decreed at Rs. 40/- per month. In the revision before the learned District Judge the decree of the trial Court for eviction of the defendant was challenged only on the ground that the suit for ejectment instituted on 1-8-1972 on the strength...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »